I think it was the right decision. If you didn't give her the pill it's Juno all over again but not as...well award winning. Under-age pregnancy is a bad thing in my opinion. I'm not sure on the goverment part though
The morning after pill dilemma
- Thread starter scorrishbeef
- Start date
Recommended Videos
And that would be an entirely separate conversation into the issue of morality via legislation. It doesn't, however, change the core point which is that the moral twinges of a third party does not entitle them to make decisions in the life of someone over whom they do not hold caretakership.captainfluoxetine said:
At most in this particular situation it would be correct for the pharmacy to contact the doctor that issued the prescription for confirmation. But that is where the responsibility of the pharmacy ends.
Health care services shall provide equal service to everyone, without bias or judgement. Withholding health care as "punishment" for a supposed crime - without even being tried and convicted in court - is wrong on several levels.
Witholding healthcare as means to persuading people to do what you want them to is also wrong. If you have made it illegal, then that's enough. If they do it anyway, you can scold them for it in court, but at the hospital they shall be tended to.
Healers do the healing, judges do the judging... and the two shall not mix.
/S
Witholding healthcare as means to persuading people to do what you want them to is also wrong. If you have made it illegal, then that's enough. If they do it anyway, you can scold them for it in court, but at the hospital they shall be tended to.
Healers do the healing, judges do the judging... and the two shall not mix.
/S
People will always want sex and some will submit lawfully to its vice and some will go for it earlier, preventing access to the morning after pill will not slow underage sex IMO.. because the people who have underage sex generally either don't know about the pill or are taking precautions to prevent it going that far..
Yeah its a good decision, I'm pro abortion (before the nervous system develops otherwise you're gonna have to put it up for adoption) so one less pregnant teen who can have an education without the hassle of babies is good..
No there is no need for parents to get involved, its not their business..
Yeah its a good decision, I'm pro abortion (before the nervous system develops otherwise you're gonna have to put it up for adoption) so one less pregnant teen who can have an education without the hassle of babies is good..
No there is no need for parents to get involved, its not their business..
1. Yes, it was the right decision. Fine, the girl shouldn't be having sex, but it's apparent from what she said that she and her boyfriend used a condom, so at least they're aware of safe sex and are practicing it. Bearing that in mind, she and her boyfriend are obviously sensible enough to know the risks and to take precautionary measures. Regarding the idea of telling the parents, what about patient confidentiality? You can't just go around telling people's secrets or personal life details because you think it's the right thing to do, it's more immoral to ignore that privacy than it is for someone to be having sex underage, especially when, as has already been stated, that person is aware of the risks and is taking all the right precautions.scorrishbeef said:
2. Regarding the government, the UK government would punish the male involved, as the law states (yes, I am also British), if you were to report this to the authorities. So you can hardly say that it's the government's fault for not punishing either child because how can they punish someone when they don't know that anything illegal has happened? Regarding providing the morning after pill, you may as well ask if it's orally right to provide condoms or free chlymidia testing to people who are underage. The thing is, the government offers these things, but isn't promoting underage sex in any way. The government has all sorts of campaigns urging kids not to have sex until they're old enough, so they definitely are not promoting underage sex. However, the government is also aware that no matter what they say or do, kids are still going to have sex with each other, so the best thing is to make sure that they are aware of the risks (as this girl was) and are taking the right steps to prevent any danger from STDs or unwanted pregnancy. In my opinion, therefore, the government is doing exactly what it should be doing. It would be much more immoral for you and for the government to refuse to give underage people things like condoms or the morning after pill, and place them at risk, instead of giving it to them and making sure they're properly educated about sex and protection.
1. Was this the right decision? (should the parents have been informed? should she have been declined the pill due to being underage)
In this case, it was. In my opinion, the parents and the authorities should have been informed if you had suspected abuse, but since that was apparently not the case, you made the right call.
As for declining the pill because of her being underage, that's a no in my book; what she did may have been against the law, but you wouldn't exactly be helping either by wagging your finger, telling her "We told you so" and burdening her with a kid she's in no way ready to take care of at that age, thus adding to the already sad rate of teen pregnancies.
2. Should the government be encouraging underage sexual activity by not only providing the morning after pill but also by not having any form of punishment doing so. (we did not inform the authorities as it was deemed to be "appropriate")
I'm not sure how it works in Scotland, but isn't there such a thing as doctor-patient confidentiality? It doesn't apply in abuse cases or suspected abuse cases, but seeing how neither was the case, the oath stands. Can't they actually shitcan you for breaking it without proper reason? I think that as a doctor you should advise your patients of what and what not to do, but in the end your job is not that of a 14-year-old girl's moral and/or legal guardian; breaking confidentiality in this case (with or without legal basis) would have potentially screw up the girl's life in all kinds of nasty ways, and I believe that does go against "do no harm".
In this case, it was. In my opinion, the parents and the authorities should have been informed if you had suspected abuse, but since that was apparently not the case, you made the right call.
As for declining the pill because of her being underage, that's a no in my book; what she did may have been against the law, but you wouldn't exactly be helping either by wagging your finger, telling her "We told you so" and burdening her with a kid she's in no way ready to take care of at that age, thus adding to the already sad rate of teen pregnancies.
2. Should the government be encouraging underage sexual activity by not only providing the morning after pill but also by not having any form of punishment doing so. (we did not inform the authorities as it was deemed to be "appropriate")
I'm not sure how it works in Scotland, but isn't there such a thing as doctor-patient confidentiality? It doesn't apply in abuse cases or suspected abuse cases, but seeing how neither was the case, the oath stands. Can't they actually shitcan you for breaking it without proper reason? I think that as a doctor you should advise your patients of what and what not to do, but in the end your job is not that of a 14-year-old girl's moral and/or legal guardian; breaking confidentiality in this case (with or without legal basis) would have potentially screw up the girl's life in all kinds of nasty ways, and I believe that does go against "do no harm".
Giving her the pill was a wise choice, as stated many a time, another teenage pregnancy is not what Britain needs (#1 in Europe, three cheers guys? we finally won something)
However her parents should DEFINETLY have been contacted, she's not 18 so she doesn't have the rights of an adult and being under 16 she's not under the legal age for sex, so she basically "broke the law" but i dont think they can actually prosecute you for that in my opinion it's a stupid guideline (im not condoning minor sexual activity all im saying is i dont think it should be a law like drinking at 18). This is the sort of thing we need to fight in modern day society, the tabboo of sex etc. If the parents are level headed they'd obviously be angry and dissapointed but they'd have to accept their daughter is sexually active and tell her that she doesn't want to go and get pregnant but im sure the scare of the condom breaking would be enough to rattle her.
However her parents should DEFINETLY have been contacted, she's not 18 so she doesn't have the rights of an adult and being under 16 she's not under the legal age for sex, so she basically "broke the law" but i dont think they can actually prosecute you for that in my opinion it's a stupid guideline (im not condoning minor sexual activity all im saying is i dont think it should be a law like drinking at 18). This is the sort of thing we need to fight in modern day society, the tabboo of sex etc. If the parents are level headed they'd obviously be angry and dissapointed but they'd have to accept their daughter is sexually active and tell her that she doesn't want to go and get pregnant but im sure the scare of the condom breaking would be enough to rattle her.
You do what the law says you must do. It will be your ass if you don't.scorrishbeef said:
People are going to have sex. We are all here because of it. There is little you can do to get people to stop. All we can really do is inform them on how it works and what the consequences are.scorrishbeef said:
While I expect there are some that foolishly use the morning after pill as their primary form of birth control, I don't see the government supplying it as encouragement.
Punishment for something that comes natural is pretty much the worst thing you can do to "discourage" it. It will continue to happen but, it will be hidden more. When something goes wrong they will try to hide it. The longer they wait the worse it will probably get. The worst possible case with this is if something does go wrong but, they don't know it.
What needs to be done is education. It is best to wait until you are physically and mentally more mature. If you can't this is all the stuff you should be aware of and what to do if certain things happen. It needs to be actual educations and not scare tactic. Scare tactics have almost the same effect has the punishment mentality.
I think it would have been cruel to say no, i mean if they had the kid there lifes would have been ruined.
1. Yes.
2. I don't know what themes your country was founded on. But the less the government has control over the people the better.
2. I don't know what themes your country was founded on. But the less the government has control over the people the better.
1. Is it legal to give her the pill without telling her parents? Then do it. Should you have, probably as she was also drinking.
2. I don't think that's encouraging it, that's discouraging teen pregnancy it'd be like outlawing the sale of condoms to anyone under 21, you are essentially garunteeing pregnancy if they can't avoid it. Don't tell them it's ok to have under age sex, but don't make it impossible to have PROTECTED under age sex.
2. I don't think that's encouraging it, that's discouraging teen pregnancy it'd be like outlawing the sale of condoms to anyone under 21, you are essentially garunteeing pregnancy if they can't avoid it. Don't tell them it's ok to have under age sex, but don't make it impossible to have PROTECTED under age sex.
At the end of the day, she's responsible and come to get the pill rather then trying to hide and finding she's pregnant several weeks later.scorrishbeef said:
yes its wrong that she's under-age, but there are thousands the same. Kids will be kids and there is no stopping them. Even telling their parents doesnt always work unless their parents are so bad that they can terrify the kid to listen.
She admitted to using a condom, if the sex was consensual then so be it. They tried to be safe, so at the end of the day, they were both mature 14yr olds to even CONSIDER protection, especially after drinking. When she knew the protection failed, she hit the next best thing.
I personally dont believe in the pill, but I suppose in this sort of situation, it was the best decision.
Not to be a jerk but if I were you I would have said "Tough luck, make better choices." and walked away.
i think when it comes to sex a person has a right to privacy i'd talk to her before giving her the pill make sure she knows what she's doing that she's aloud to say no (some girls really don't but it should be up to her